|
|
10-19-2018, 01:03 AM
|
#766
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,144
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clocker
With a tax cut and a spending increase under the Republicans?
|
Individual appropriation bills will start with the next budget......no more omnibus budgets. Of course, a favorable election would speed things along. The democrats are virtually fighting for their lives.
|
|
|
10-19-2018, 01:56 AM
|
#767
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,957
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by davew
...Anyone willing to predict how many inches the oceans will be higher and the average temperature will be higher in 2050? The 97% climate scientists must have accurate models because of their settled science, but I can not seem to find them.
|
There's plenty of projections out there - you must not have looked very hard....
https://therevelator.org/interactive-map-climate-2050/
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science...a-map-for-that
Just click on the maps near where you live to see how much wetter or warmer it will be in your neighborhood.
The problem with forecasting sea level changes or temperatures is inflection points. We have plenty of paleoclimatology analyses to validate how the Earth's climate has changed over time, but most models smooth the rates to fit the data, implying slow changes. However, with systems like the Earth's climate, rapid changes can happen in short periods of time, and if the next three decades passes a point like that, we could see a huge swing (relatively speaking). For example, if a model happens to accurately predict that by 2100, sea level will be six feet higher than today, that doesn't mean a straight line of about 1 inch per year. (current rate is about 0.13 inches per year, but poised to accelerate). There could be a short term bump as one of the ice shelves breaks off.
Personally, I'm not too worried by climate change. We'll have much, much bigger problems to face as a species prior to 2050.
|
|
|
10-19-2018, 05:50 PM
|
#768
|
Smarty Pants
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Every Vote Counts
Posts: 3,160
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkview_Pirate
We'll have much, much bigger problems to face as a species prior to 2050.
|
Like what oh sage?
|
|
|
10-22-2018, 12:00 AM
|
#769
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Denver
Posts: 4,163
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clocker
Solar panel installation jobs don't last if the costs of solar panels, including tariffs, price too many consumers out of the market.
|
Solar panel installation jobs don't last if the costs of solar panels, including tariffs, price too many consumers out of the market, UNLESS THE STATES OR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PROVIDE REBATES OR TAX CREDITS. Trump will probably stop federal rebates, but the states can still offer them.
There are new technologies for solar being developed. Companies (like Panasonic) are developing new applications (photovoltaic) for homes and industrial developments. And don't forget, the panels on the rooftops are one type of solar. There are new utility scale solar developments (concentrating solar power) on the California/Nevada border - I've actually been to Ivanpah. And the last I looked there were more than 26,000 MW of utility-scale solar projects under development.
Coal jobs won't last long either as long as natural gas prices are low and renewable energy keeps growing. It just isn't worth it to utilities to try to upgrade deteriorating power plants. Plus, and this is often mistakenly ignored, the cost of pollution control technologies makes coal even less appealing and renewables more so.
Frankly, I don't think this kind of thing is on your specialty list.
Something I wrote: https://westgov.org/images/editor/St...nergy_2013.pdf
Last edited by HalvOnHorseracing; 10-22-2018 at 12:04 AM.
|
|
|
10-22-2018, 02:28 AM
|
#770
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 3,641
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clocker
I am old enough to remember that a big deal for kids was when the Sears Christmas catalog arrived in the mail.
|
and here they are. I found many of the things I had as a child in here.
My first microscope and chemistry set, etc.
Find the year you were a kid and start looking.
It's been a whole lot of fun looking thru these with my brothers and friends:
http://www.wishbookweb.com/the-catalogs/
Then, head over to the Vermont Country store and find the candy of your childhood.
Last edited by clicknow; 10-22-2018 at 02:30 AM.
|
|
|
10-22-2018, 03:29 AM
|
#771
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,144
|
Patrick Michaels,a climatologist, who disagrees with the 31 computer models that are used to predict the climate change debacle. He gives an in depth interview with Mark Levin. He is in favor of the Russian model which is much less severe.
He also explains politicalization of climate change. It all started when President FDR wanted to improve American's diet and improve crop production using science. It revolved into a debate about nuclear energy and climate change. If you are still on the fence about climate change his rebuttals offer a lot of common sense answers .
For myself, it describes how government gets involved in something with good intentions and it spins completely out of control. In most cases term limits would solve the problem.
Calm discussion at the link:
|
|
|
10-22-2018, 09:01 AM
|
#772
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 30,398
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by incoming
Patrick Michaels,a climatologist, who disagrees with the 31 computer models that are used to predict the climate change debacle. He gives an in depth interview with Mark Levin. He is in favor of the Russian model which is much less severe.
He also explains politicalization of climate change. It all started when President FDR wanted to improve American's diet and improve crop production using science. It revolved into a debate about nuclear energy and climate change. If you are still on the fence about climate change his rebuttals offer a lot of common sense answers .
For myself, it describes how government gets involved in something with good intentions and it spins completely out of control. In most cases term limits would solve the problem.
Calm discussion at the link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frviKqDWRl4
|
He is one of the few climatologists who disagrees with the overwhelming scientific consensus that it will be much worse than he claims.
That consensus stands at 97%. Wonder if this has anything to do with it.
Clientele
Michaels' firm does not disclose who its clients are, but leaked documents have revealed that several were power utilities which operate coal power stations. On a 2007 academic CV, Michaels disclosed that prior to creating his firm he had received funding from the Edison Electric Institute and the Western Fuels Association. He has also been a frequent speaker with leading coal and energy companies as well as coal and other industry lobby groups.[4]
|
|
|
10-22-2018, 10:03 AM
|
#773
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Norfolk VA
Posts: 6,246
|
Quote:
That consensus stands at 97%. Wonder if this has anything to do with it.
|
97% is debatable, but assuming that figure is true, did the entire 97% conduct their own independent research, or are they just rubber stamping someone else's work?
|
|
|
10-22-2018, 10:07 AM
|
#774
|
The Voice of Reason!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 112,861
|
A whole lot of things have been 97%+ consensus and turned out to be wrong.
Since jumps to conclusions to sooth feeble minds. Then it amends itself later and says Oops.
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
|
|
|
10-22-2018, 10:23 AM
|
#775
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 30,398
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by delayjf
97% is debatable, but assuming that figure is true, did the entire 97% conduct their own independent research, or are they just rubber stamping someone else's work?
|
It is more than one study.
The 97% consensus on global warming
https://www.skepticalscience.com/glo...-consensus.htm
Science achieves a consensus when scientists stop arguing. When a question is first asked – like ‘what would happen if we put a load more CO2 in the atmosphere?’ – there may be many hypotheses about cause and effect. Over a period of time, each idea is tested and retested – the processes of the scientific method – because all scientists know that reputation and kudos go to those who find the right answer (and everyone else becomes an irrelevant footnote in the history of science). Nearly all hypotheses will fall by the wayside during this testing period, because only one is going to answer the question properly, without leaving all kinds of odd dangling bits that don’t quite add up. Bad theories are usually rather untidy.
|
|
|
10-22-2018, 10:48 AM
|
#776
|
The Voice of Reason!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 112,861
|
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
|
|
|
10-22-2018, 03:41 PM
|
#777
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 30,398
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom
|
We have made progress in understanding how man made emissions have altered the biosphere. Your 2 addled minded "Bens" only stand in the way of science, and explain things in a only a very misleading way.
|
|
|
10-22-2018, 03:56 PM
|
#778
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 30,398
|
https://www.skepticalscience.com/glo...-consensus.htm
Scientific consensus on human-caused global warming as compared to the expertise of the surveyed sample. There’s a strong correlation between consensus and climate science expertise. Illustration: John Cook. Available on the SkS Graphics page
Expert consensus is a powerful thing. People know we don’t have the time or capacity to learn about everything, and so we frequently defer to the conclusions of experts. It’s why we visit doctors when we’re ill. The same is true of climate change: most people defer to the expert consensus of climate scientists. Crucially, as we note in our paper:
Public perception of the scientific consensus has been found to be a gateway belief, affecting other climate beliefs and attitudes including policy support.
That’s why those who oppose taking action to curb climate change have engaged in a misinformation campaign to deny the existence of the expert consensus. They’ve been largely successful, as the public badly underestimate the expert consensus, in what we call the “consensus gap.” Only 16% of Americans realize that the consensus is above 90%.
|
|
|
10-22-2018, 04:55 PM
|
#779
|
The Voice of Reason!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 112,861
|
So no progress.
Thanks for playing.
Ben Fun!
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
|
|
|
10-23-2018, 12:52 AM
|
#780
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,649
|
hcap, I hope you donate heavily to 'skeptical science' so they can continue their propaganda campaign.
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|